Is there such thing as an easy subject?

[ben92]

Hello. Does this logic work? With regard to earning a high scaled score, there is no such thing as an easy subject?

a) The study score is a rank, not a mark. Thus, perceived 'simple' content matter has no influence on our mark as all students benefit equally from this simplicity.
b) A subject with an easier cohort is brought down by a markdown. Being a big fish in a small pond thus carries no advantage, as it is difficult to achieve a high enough raw to avoid the brunt of the markdown.
c) Thus there's no way a subject can be 'easy.'

Where have I got it wrong? I theorise that it fails to take into account smart people who just don't try for whatever reason (i.e. want a bludge subject.)

[brightsky]

What defines the level of difficulty of a subject is entirely in the eyes of the beholder. To be a bit trite, maths/science-orientated individual may consider Methods, Specialist, Chem, Physics and Biology particularly easy for them, while one who enjoys humanities may consider English, Classics, etc. easy. Your proposition in a) is correct, but when measuring up the perceived level of difficulty in each unique case, the term 'simpler' becomes  subjective as everyone would have different views on different subjects according to what their interests/strengths are. But I agree with b). I think you should alter your theory to say there's no such thing as a subject that has an unfair advantage in terms of scaling, but that is a bit controversial too considering all the qualms about scaling over 50.

[ben92]

I agree difficulty is subjective, but I meant difficulty for the people doing those subjects. Of course people doing physics will find it easier than those who chose not to.

I don't think scaling over 50 is unfair. Doesn't someone with a 50 in Specialist deserve more than someone with a 50 in Further?

Edit: Slight bias, I'm getting near-100% SAC results for French.

[brightsky]

I don't really understand what you mean in your first point...You do learn the same stuff when you do the subjects, but the subjectivity is still there. There may be people in the Specialist Maths class that find it really difficult as they are more humanities people, while some are natural mathematicians and, when sitting in an English class, would find the subject relatively harder.

Yeah, definitely someone getting a 50 in Specialist deserves more than someone with a 50 in Further, but considering a few years back when an aggregate of >210 was required for a 99.95, people could not get a 99.95 if not for a subject scaling over 50 in their subject selection. This inevitably has concerns of biasness, for firstly, how can you compare English to Specialist, as the nature of both are different? What is it about Specialist that makes it any harder (and deserving higher scaling) than English? Also, subjects that scale from 50 -> 55 like Latin, Hebrew and Ancient Greek are only taught at select schools, mostly prestigious private schools that can afford to employ a teacher that is learned in those (dead) languages.

On another note, great job in French!! 50 coming your way!

[ben92]

Thanks - I'm keeping my estimate low (45) as to not disappoint myself. The difference between 45 and 50 is only 2 after the scaling (52, 54) anyway.

What I meant was you cannot pick up the perceived 'easy' (i.e. PE) subjects and do better than those who worked through the perceived 'hard' ones (i.e. Methods).

E.G: I haven't dropped a mark in IT, and my teacher thinks I could be getting a 50 if not high 40. I was wondering if by choosing a subject with (most people would say) easier subject matter (seriously, go read the exam) and a dumber cohort (as evidenced in the 30->25 scaledown) I was getting an unfair bonus to my ATAR.

[brightsky]

Yeah, generally with the easier subjects, it's much harder to get a good mark because so many people do well in it. For example, one or two mistakes in the Further exam can cost you dearly, whereas making one or two mistakes in a Spesh exam won't be as significant.

[jimmy999]

Yeah, generally with the easier subjects, it's much harder to get a good mark because so many people do well in it. For example, one or two mistakes in the Further exam can cost you dearly, whereas making one or two mistakes in a Spesh exam won't be as significant.

Not necessarily. To me IT was a much easier subject than Methods, Chemistry and Specialist yet out of those 4 IT was my lowest score.

The thing about maths is true though, 4 marks off my exams for Methods gave me a 48. Yet 4 marks off a Further exam could've resulted in a 45. Scaling can be unfair sometimes. Take Chemistry, which even for a science-minded person, can still be a difficult subject. Come to the exam, if it's really hard, the A+ cutoff is much lower (78% for unit 3 2009). Which actually gives you more space to get an A+ because anywhere from 78% to 100% is an A+. So getting high on that exam will automatically boost your raw score up higher, then when scaling comes in, your score gets boosted even more.

Now compare this to a subject in which it can be harder to get an A+ in. We'll use Physics for last year. A+ cutoff was roughly 96% for both exams. Therefore a couple of mistake will ruin your A+ and those stop you from getting A+. Yet this subject ends up scaling less than Chemistry does, so really that doesn't seem fair as it was harder to get an A+ in Physics than it was in Chemistry, yet Chemistry gave you more scaling on top of an already high raw score

[vexx]

An easy subject is so overly subjective it's not even possible to talk about with anyone.

Further is ridiculously easy for content, but so competitive and they make everything annoying that it is not that easy to do amazingly well, so it is a pretty easy subject all together.

I personally think Chem is quite easy, but others find it is more difficult...

Some subjects like PE are quite easy for understanding content, but to do well actually require a massive amount to be memorised and understood, and what needs to be known is sometimes a bit fuzzy, so it isn't that easy of a subject. But if you know your stuff, you will do well; since a lot of people doing the subject cannot be bothered with all the work people dont understand it has.. Unlike some other subjects.

Methods can be easy at times and for some it is so easy. See all subjective?

Languages if you are doing okay-well, are easy to do well due to scaling, etc, etc.

[ben92]

You guys realise I never said a subject's difficulty wasn't subjective? Note how I wrote of 'perceived' simplicity in my first point. It's of course subjective, but we all know more would read a Further textbook and find it 'simple' than would a Methods book.

My point was, in this example, taking the 'easier' Further meant no advantage at all. The Study Score is a rank, not a raw mark, (now read carefully) thus it's no advantage that you find a subject easy. You can only do well in an 'easy' subject if you find it even 'easier' than others, which would require that you be smart. If you need to be smart to do well in a subject, then it's not an easy subject.

Similarly, doing a subject filled with idiots (i.e. those who do poorly on the GAT) is no advantage either due to the markdown that would ensue. While most who do Further are weaker in math, that doesn't mean doing Further to get a high 40 is 'easy.' While you would get a higher raw score - it is a weaker cohort - the markdown would negate this advantage.

[jimmy999]

Also look at my scores. My lower scores are considered easier than my higher scores. Yet my top score was in one of the "hardest" subjects and my lowest in one of the "easier" subjects. It's also a frame of mind. Something is only difficult if you think it to be hard. It's why most people refrain from doing specialist and those who do it don't do as well as they should have because they just assume it's so hard it's impossible for them to do well. It's simply the way you think about the subject

[Visionz]

At the end of the day theyre only year 12 subjects. How hard can they be? Its not like the final year of a doctorate. You arent discovering anything or expanding the field. Thinking something is too hard would discourage anyone. However, if you give it a go, youre not retarded and youve got the persistence to finish whatever you start then you should be successful.

[vexx]

At the end of the day theyre only year 12 subjects. How hard can they be? Its not like the final year of a doctorate. You arent discovering anything or expanding the field. Thinking something is too hard would discourage anyone. However, if you give it a go, youre not retarded and youve got the persistence to finish whatever you start then you should be successful.

exactly. they aren't made to be hard, just need to work for them to perfect them and get as high as possible making little mistakes.